I'm saying there is nothing in science to suggest an ice free arctic will disrupt the thermohaline circulation, so instead of just saying it, post something in science to support your claim! You can't figure out that saying so doesn't make sense and treat your own words as facts.
If you can't post science to support your position, then your position isn't based on science.
Science, like the research paper abstracts talking about various aspects of how sea ice affects thermohaline circulation? Or do you want a link to Carlos Duarte mentioning it in his "enquiring minds" lecture available on Youtube?
Do you know what the word disrupt means?
If you want to be taken seriously, I can recommend not questioning my knowledge of basic English as a good starting point.
North Atlantic Deep Water Formation doesn't happen next to the sea ice and Greenland like the image in your Catlin survey shows. If it doesn't happen that way, why go to the trouble to make a map showing that it does?
As far as I am aware the precise sites of deep water formation are not fixed and can move around. It should be beyond dispute that there will be significant changes within the arctic basin.
You may feel that if the main site of deep water formation is nearby, it will remain unaffected by large changes in close proximity. You may feel that it won't move, that overturning will not be affected by a change in behaviour in the large adjacent body of water. You may feel that the Arctic is just a remote cold area that can be disconnected from the earth system and ignored, too - but I would dispute all counts.
The fact that all the oceans are involved in thermohaline circulation seems to be ignored.
Precisely my point? (including the Arctic ocean)
What does the data show concerning transport of heat to the arctic by the oceans? Has it declined with the arctic sea ice or increased?
IPCC forecasts are for decreasing transport of heat to the Arctic via the oceans.
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch10s10-es-15-atlantic-ocean.htmlObservations are suggestive of a slowing of thermohaline circulation, but data is limited. There does appear to have been an unusual event in 2009/10 where it slowed markedly. Look at Fig 3 at the following link - states the science is not well enough understood and we urgently need to understand it better (which makes it odd you know better about all this...):
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/full/10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00151.1This is Duarte's lecture referred to:
He talks about thermohaline circulation from 28:00 onwards, but I strongly recommend the whole thing to anyone who hasn't seen it who is interested in what is happening in the Arctic (he covers methane too).
Things tend to seem to you the way you choose to allow them to seem. No one has to predict, because the world hasn't always had arctic sea ice.
Care to back this assertion up with some scientific evidence of what has happened regarding thermohaline circulation during previous ice free regimes? (preferably as analogous as possible to current conditions, at least in the key respects)
Again, you go back to talking about changes and not disruptions. Sea ice has to have an affect on temperature (thermo), because ice regulates the temperature of the water below it. Sea ice ejects brine (haline), so it's creating fresher water at the surface and protecting that fresher water from mixing with the more saline waters in the Arctic Ocean. Changes always make changes and that thermohaline circulation is changing whether it's in a world with or without arctic sea ice. There are many things losing that arctic sea ice during the summer won't do and disrupting thermohaline circulation is one of them.
I already posted any number of links suggesting possibility for effects on thermohaline circulation within the Arctic basin (and not just in this post).
I disagree strongly that thermohaline circulation is not going to be impacted. I believe it will be, and I'm tipping it as one of the next big things we can expect. The changes to the jet stream took me off guard (and I think a lot of other people) and it's clear the earth system is far more complicated than we can understand. Therefore I'm looking at what I think is going to happen next - once the ice is gone. The oceans seem a strong candidate.
The question in mind is not whether thermohaline circulation will be impacted - the question is how serious will be the resulting changes be in the context of everything else that is going on. That's much harder to answer as it requires a bit more quantitative input as opposed to purely qualitative (by the way, Duarte puts the lie to your notion of it meaning an ice age for Europe if it slows/stops by superimposing the other warming to show a final picture).
There's too much junk (whether intentional or not) in the rest of your answer for me to want to reply to each single point. Sorry. Thermohaline circulation is neither well monitored, nor easy to do so, and evaporation (when, where, how much) itself is liable to be impacted by the ongoing changes (the earth system is highly interconnected).
However, if you could kindly provide at least a tiny bit of the science you say I'm not offering, I'd appreciate it.
Otherwise I'm still very interested in any views on this - as I say - I'm starting to consider that it might be one of the near future things that come up next. The next "unknown unknown", as it were. If I can gather my thoughts together to a more refined extent I'll kick off a thread just for it, if I can't already find one.